Tag: housing shortage

Abundant Housing Illinois statement on BUILD, PRO, and FAIR

Abundant Housing Illinois is a pro-housing organization that advocates for abundant housing and sustainable, inclusive cities throughout Illinois. Our website is currently being migrated to a new platform so we shared this statement about the Protecting Renters Ordinance on our Bluesky and now on my blog. (I am one of the leads of Abundant Housing Illinois.)

Abundant Housing Illinois endorsement graphic: If you want cheaper housing, push BUILD. If you want cheaper housing and tenant rights, push BUILD and vote for an amended PRO.

We’re happy to hear that there’s been extensive commentary in City Council and elsewhere in Chicago on housing affordability. Given all this new discussion, we recommend this plan of action for all the aldermen who have correctly bemoaned the city’s top ranking of places where rents have increased the most:

If you’re serious about Chicago’s housing shortage and skyrocketing housing prices, work with us to pass Governor Pritzker’s BUILD plan.

As research from Chicago Community Trust shows, the Chicagoland housing market is regional. As many other states have shown, one of the best mechanisms to address high housing costs locally is to pass laws at the state level. The laws of Illinois and Chicago’s neighboring municipalities that suppress new housing from being built also affect every ward’s housing market. Governor Pritzker understands this.

The BUILD plan is a common sense reform that will allow us to rebuild the neighborhood character of Chicago. The missing middle advocated for in his plan is present already as the beloved 2-to-4 flats in nearly every community area of Chicago. The missing middle bill already has many municipal elected officials against it – nothing is stopping our municipal elected officials for pushing in favor. In other states local elected champions made the difference.

With budget season upon us, there’s one more thing worth stating: housing growth is a revenue strategy. The Chicago Financial Future Task Force’s final report explicitly called out policies echoed in BUILD as revenue generators. The recently passed 21st century ROAD to Housing Act means these reforms could impact federal money for Chicago and other municipalities in Illinois. More housing means more residents, a broader tax base, and more options for Chicagoans already here.

A witness slip takes 3 minutes to fill out, a letter to the editor takes 30, a social media video explainer takes an afternoon. If you’re serious about addressing the housing shortage and helping pass BUILD, we’re happy to help with all the above and more. Your voice as an alder impacts statewide officials – your relationships with representatives outside Chicago are crucial now more than ever.

However, there have been extensive conversations about updating the RLTO that outlines how tenants and housing providers relate to each other across Chicago. As the Chicago and Illinois chapter of YIMBY Action, increasing housing stability is one of our five core policy pillars. It’s not our primary focus but we have a vested interest in the update. Since both ordinances concern mostly housing stability policies, not housing supply policies, we believe that they should be evaluated primarily on those benefits.

After extensive deliberation with members and partners across Chicagoland, including leadership in both the PRO and FAIR coalitions, Abundant Housing Illinois is endorsing the Protecting Renters Ordinance plus certain changes from the FAIR proposal.

We’re grateful for the viewpoints and leadership the FAIR coalition have brought to this debate. Reasoned dissent makes policy better, and we see this here with what the FAIR folks have brought to the table. Many of the changes we’re recommending are lifted directly from FAIR. We’re grateful for the supply provisions added in FAIR, and look forward to working with Chair Villegas, the Zoning Committee, and City Council on all of these policies and more. We’re especially grateful for the input from the Neighborhood Building Owner’s Alliance; Chicago’s small and midsized housing providers deserve a seat at the table, and we hope further negotiation keeps centering their input along with other interested parties.

PRO maintains existing tenant law protections – something our members say is key to any update of the RLTO. PRO’s placement of most tenant law enforcement in the Department of Housing allows the Department of Building to continue its important focus on permitting new homes and home habitability. PRO’s approach to junk fees was praised by the National Consumer Law Center and is roughly consistent with Evanston and Cook County’s existing approaches, easing compliance for housing providers who work inside and outside of Chicago. PRO also codifies the right to counsel and creates a fully detailed and funded rental registry. Leads of ours have been advocating for a rental registry since 2023! These policies have been successful across many places in increasing housing stability while minimally impacting housing production.

For those concerned that PRO will increase rent – market prices are set by supply. PRO will not increase rent as much as our housing shortage currently does. Where demand is high and prices are high, like in much of Chicago right now, an operations cost increase of no more than $5/unit per month will have minimal bearing on what the rent is.

There are some changes we’d like to see in PRO.

  • The definition of ‘owner occupied’ should include ‘good faith’ owner occupants who have placed their properties in LLCs.
  • PRO should use FAIR’s security deposit cap limits and a more realistic effective date.
  • Allowable fees for prospective tenants should adhere to a ‘reasonable-cost’ standard like in Illinois’ Rental Fee Transparency and Fairness Act.
  • Caps on other fees and fines should be indexed to inflation, to ensure additional costs by housing providers and tenants are born fairly.
  • Rental registry fees should transition to resourcing from the city’s budget, so all of Chicago can share the responsibility of maintaining the registry and not just renters and housing providers; we understand that might be difficult with Chicago’s current budget constraints.

We firmly believe that the best tenant protection a city can provide is having plenty of housing options. Chicago needs to make housing easier and less expensive to build so we can stop being the city with the fastest growing rent in the country. Beyond BUILD, AHIL has model ordinances ready right now for four-flats by right, elimination of minimum lot area requirements, allowing multiple detached houses on a lot, and elimination of parking mandates citywide; any elected official for the City who wants to introduce one should contact us.

Supply work shouldn’t wait. It also isn’t a reason to delay smart policy helping Chicagoans stay where they are. If you want cheaper housing, push BUILD. If you want cheaper housing and tenant rights, push BUILD and vote for an amended PRO.

Warmly,

Abundant Housing Illinois

Update, October 2026: We’ve since published detailed follow-ups on two parts of PRO: what Chicago’s rental registry should collect, and how to pay for it, and how Chicago should regulate rental junk fees.

Okay, 2026 should be the year Illinois lawmakers do something about the housing shortage

Governor JB Pritzker announced his plan to address the state’s housing shortage in 2026. This is the third year in a row I’ve written about proposed legislation to unlock new housing in Illinois, and this should be the year – the governor and General Assembly leadership are fully aligned since they, together, introduced bills cover six major land use, zoning, and housing development reforms.

Pritzker’s budget address on Wednesday covered a wide range of housing issues in four minutes:

  • the size of the shortage (227,000 new homes are needed by 2030 to keep up with demand)
  • everything is too damned expensive! rent is too high!
  • not enough homes are being built
  • redlining played a role in housing being built less often in certain areas
  • regulations inhibit new homes and small homes from getting built
  • bureaucratic red tape
  • parking mandates require too much parking that are unused and expensive

Watch the full 4-minute housing speech, part of his hourlong budget address.

I propose some non-exhaustive reasons why the average Illinoisan might want to support these reforms:

  • There are 6% year-over-year rent increases which is making it hard for Illinois to be a competitive place to maintain its population and its services. Population loss results in higher costs for everyone because services and pensions are paid for by fewer people.
  • I want Illinois to lose as few Congressional seats as possible in 2030.
  • It encourages new development which spreads the tax burden onto more taxpayers and lowers it for any given taxpayer.

Ask your legislator to support the BUILD plan by sending them a letter. All you have to do is enter your address and the modify the subject line.

It’s a whole set of reforms to lower housing costs

To resolve these issues, Gov. Pritzker is working with legislative leaders in the Illinois House and Illinois Senate to adopt a package of bills:

Third Party Review (SB 4063, Ellman)

In cases where a municipality cannot review a building permit quickly enough an applicant could hire a third-party reviewer. The municipality would have to complete its initial plan review within 15 business days for a one or two-family house, and within 30 business days for “any multifamily, mixed-use, or commercial project”. Each subsequent review cycle would need to be completed within 10 business days.

Additionally, the bill would set inspection standards, specifically requiring a municipality to perform inspections within two business days of the request. Applicants could also use third-party inspector if the municipality does not meet the standard. Municipalities cannot charge additional fees if an applicant exercises this right, and qualified third-party reviewers and inspectors would not be permitted to charge more than the municipality’s fee.

Finally, the bill sets qualification, conflict of interest, and auditing standards, and the bill would also apply to home rule municipalities.


Legalizing Middle Housing (SB 4060, Hunter)

This is a big deal and is the key to unlock the solution to the housing shortage in Illinois. It would allow multifamily housing as of right on all lots that have a minimum area of 2,500 s.f. (To give some context the most common residential lot size in Chicago is 3,125 s.f. and in Oak Park the average residential lot ranges between 4,000 s.f. and 13,000 s.f. depending on the zoning district.)

The bill would permit between two and eight units of housing per lot in a residential zoning district, depending on the size of the lot. It would also permit new housing types that most municipalities ban:

  • Duplexes (a.k.a. two-flats)
  • Triplexes
  • Fourplexes
  • Cottage clusters
  • Townhouses
  • Stacked-flat plexes
  • Attached courtyard housing
  • Detached courtyard housing. This would allow a front house and an equal size rear house, which Chicago has vintage examples of and some architecture firms have proposed as part of the Missing Middle Infill Housing initiative, but the Chicago zoning code does not permit)
Future Firm, a design studio based in Chicago, created this concept that places two detached houses on a single property in Chicago. The current zoning code there does not permit more than one principal building per zoning lot, so if this were to get built the two houses would have to share some part of their structures.

What are some potential impacts?

In Chicago, there are 14,148 vacant lots that are zoned in a way that bans multi-family housing. If 5 percent of those were developed each year with a two-flat that would reduce the city’s housing shortage by 1,415 homes annually. (Chicago has seen an average of 4,357 new homes permitted from 2023-2025.) These zoning districts are pretty broadly distributed in Chicago, and overlap with all kinds of school attendance boundaries and near all kinds of amenities.

In Naperville, there are 35,449 (57 percent of the parcels in the city and 86 percent of parcels that allow residential uses) lots that ban multi-family housing. A minority of those would be improved to have two-family houses which would go a long way to increasing opportunity for Illinoisans (while also increase Naperville’s property tax revenues).

That’s almost too simplistic (and perhaps a bit optimistic) because the bill would permit more housing types than Chicago currently allows, like the detached courtyard housing – these new options would respond to the desire for lower-cost detached housing, increasing or maintaining the density on blocks where deconversions and teardowns are common.

The need for housing extends beyond Chicago and Oak Park. I ran this exercise here because it’s where I have the easiest access to high quality property and zoning data. Every town needs additional housing and additional housing types – for its existing residents and for future residents. Every town with transit service especially needs more housing, because more people should be allowed to take advantage of that service and that public investment.


Parking Reform (SB 4064, Cervantes)

A municipality would not be allowed to require more than 0.5 automobile parking spaces per multifamily dwelling unit or more than one automobile parking space per single-family home.

And parking mandates would be eliminated for several uses:

  • individual dwelling units that have an area smaller than 1,500 s.f.
  • affordable housing developments
  • assisted living developments
  • ground floor non-residential uses in mixed-use buildings
  • when converting a building from non-residential to residential use

The standards would also apply in home rule communities.


Single Stair Reform (SB 4061, Feigenholtz)

Residential buildings up to six stories, with a maximum of four dwelling units per floor, an automatic sprinkler system, and automatic door closers, would be permitted to have a single interior exit stairway (“single stair”). Small multifamily buildings with a single means of egress are as safe or safer than those with more than one.

A typical new apartment building in Illinois has a “double loaded corridor” layout, which has a high apartment per stair ratio. The smart stair option in the center, not currently permitted, has a much lower apartment per stair ratio. The graphic on the right shows that a single stair building can have more variation in unit layouts and sizes (number of bedrooms).

The benefits improve quality of life by making it easier to design multi-bedroom and family-size homes with additional windows for more natural light, and inset porches (allowing for cross-breezes!) because space isn’t needed for a corridor to connect every unit to a second stair way. Homes are closer to the exit in these buildings. Plus, it makes it easier for small, multifamily buildings to “pencil” (make financial sense to undertake) on infill lots which tend to have higher land values.

Note about exiting: at the time of writing I live in a 450-unit apartment building that has five stairs that lead to two exterior stairs (and then there are more stairs after that). I counted that it takes about 220 steps (I have a long stride) to reach the ground; it took me 1 minute and 21 seconds to go from my apartment door, down the stairs, and over to the exterior exit. It takes a little bit more time to descend the last stair to the ground. In a single stair building, that would be limited to 20 feet – far less than the 600-or-so feet in my current abode.

Further reading:


ADUs (SB 4071, Martwick)

Do I even have to say what this is about? The bill would permit accessory dwelling units in all zoning districts that permit residential uses. The state ADU bill, as written in HB5626, could possibly invalidate the labor requirements for coach houses in Chicago (emphasis added):

(1) Each municipality shall permit accessory dwelling units in all zoning districts that permit single-family dwellings without additional requirements for lot size, setbacks, aesthetic requirements, design review requirements, frontage, space limitations, or other controls beyond those required for single-family dwelling units without an accessory dwelling unit.


Impact Fee Modernization (SB 4062, Castro)

The state would create formulas that set maximum impact fees, relative to the impact (i.e. number of students, domestic water and sewer, etc.) and incorporate certain unique contexts, to establish certainty for home builders. Municipalities, include those with home rule authority, would have to adopt the formulas within 30 months after the bill’s effective date.


The House has this package in a single omnibus bill: HB 5626.

Abundant Housing Illinois volunteers were in Springfield yesterday to listen to Governor Pritzker’s budget speech and to push for bold housing solutions to reduce the housing shortage – evident by continually rising prices – that persists across the state.

The new bills that Governor Pritzker’s office announced today – collectively called BUILD – will have a big impact on permitting new starter homes and allowing multi-family housing all over the state, among other changes to speed up housing construction. These bills will have the biggest effect on reducing housing costs when passed collectively.

Join Abundant Housing Illinois for the next lobby day.

Read another observation in A City That Works.

Guest post: Chicago has multiple crises that more housing could mitigate

Chicago currently faces a dire financial crisis that could leave the city with a $1.2 billion budget deficit in 2026 and a potentially higher deficit in 2027. One way the city can attempt to chip away at this deficit is by expanding access to affordable and abundant residential housing across the city. This article by Joshua Chodor focuses on the communities impacted by Chicago’s shortage of affordable residential housing, why more home choices will be needed and the potential strategies that can create housing abundance.

In his 1999 book Homeland Earth, French philosopher and sociologist Edgar Morin developed a term that would encapsulate the interconnectivity and complexity of modern crises across the world. Spurred by growing fears of global warming, resource depletion and environmental destruction leading to novel diseases, Morin defined his concerns through the term “polycrisis“. 

As Morin projected, today’s modern polycrisis is defined by the convergence of climate change, international migration and humanitarian crises, the increasing rise of authoritarian governments and misinformation driving civil and social unrest globally. To call Chicago’s myriad issues a polycrisis may diminish the word’s more complex meaning. However, when identifying Chicago’s critical issues – a budget crisis, a housing crisis, a cost of living crisis and the political target that the current presidential administration has set on the city – polycrisis emerges as a valid description of the situation.

Chicago must follow a common sense agenda that creates an abundance of housing at all price points in order to alleviate these intertwined crises.

Chicago is only now seeing positive population growth after years of decline, but the stagnant pace of development has left residents with few affordable home choices within the communities they live and work. Monthly rents are reaching new highs and continued inflation contributes to a cost of living crisis impacting everyone. Rising rents with a minimal volume of new unit development not only inhibits those seeking to move into Chicago from elsewhere, but also may price existing residents out. This cycle could potentially displace long-time Chicagoans without mitigating the severe housing shortage that currently exists. 

To make Chicago a more affordable place to live for its current and future residents – and untangle this polycrisis – the city must be laser-focused on creating housing abundance. Building more housing is directly linked to the migration of new residents into the city, specifically from political migration, climate migration and international migration. 

1. Political Migration

As Republican-led states legislate against LGBTQ+ rights, attack marginalized communities and dismantle abortion and women’s healthcare access, at-risk groups and individuals will increasingly seek refuge in “blue” areas that offer them the rights and dignities that they deserve everywhere. Governor J.B. Pritzker has ensured that Illinois remains safe and welcoming to those communities unfairly targeted by an arbitrary and capricious war against anything considered “woke” – a catch-all pejorative used as an insult toward those seeking social justice. Chicago – and Illinois as a whole – must show it supports individuals of all backgrounds by expanding opportunities for new housing. In addition, as some state public health services are refuting science-backed advancements in healthcare such as the removal of fluoride from drinking water, Chicago is in a prime position to benefit from a potential influx of red state transplants for reasons related to their health and welfare. 

2. Climate Migration

After years of residential growth, sun belt states face glaring climate concerns related to extreme heat and water access. Climate change is worsening storms, floods and hurricanes, and the current presidential administration has all but asserted that it does not see this as an issue. With extreme weather and the dismantling of NOAA, FEMA and other protective agencies, many areas of the country will increasingly become unlivable – at least, for those who don’t have the means to move elsewhere. Natural disasters have become more intense, potentially jeopardizing residents’ access to clean drinking water, a situation which will drive migration out of the most threatened areas. The Great Lakes region will, in all expectation, grow in population as a direct and indirect result of unstable weather in other regions. Chicagoland will be a primary destination as one of the largest markets that can sustain a sizable population influx. Without additional housing, the climate-based migration of wealthier families and individuals could price out existing marginalized communities from their homes; Chicago must be ready for this increase of potential new residents.

3. International & Humanitarian Migration

When discussing the topic of immigration, the conversation inevitably focuses on the southern border and the law enforcement actions which target and demonize those attempting to legally migrate into the country. A clear example of this is in Texas, where razor wire has been installed on floating buoys to dissuade migration, an inhumane strategy that has led to an increase in drowning-related deaths. Some states actively dehumanize immigrants through legislation meant to instill fear in already vulnerable communities. The consequences of this crisis in Illinois magnify a noticeable difference between policies in Chicagoland compared to the rest of the state. While Chicago has strengthened its “sanctuary” protections over recent months, more than a dozen Illinois counties enacted “non-sanctuary” laws or regulations designed to antagonize immigrant communities. It is clear why international migrants, if given the opportunity, would go to a place that offers them more protection compared to the cruelty that other locations seem to enjoy inflicting. This problem will remain pervasive and, until states no longer enact dehumanizing and cruel immigration-related laws, the Chicagoland region must create more affordable and safe housing options for vulnerable immigrant communities.

Chicago must prioritize expanding its housing supply and residential development in the city and surrounding areas in order to not only mitigate existing financial concerns, but also proactively prepare for an influx of new residents. Policies, both implicit (aldermanic prerogative) and explicit (segregationist zoning codes) have created a set of individual yet interconnected crises that have stymied housing growth, worsening Chicago’s budget shortfall while maintaining racial and ethnic divisions through the denial of critical new affordable housing options. This uncertainty will continue to leave residents – both current and prospective – stuck with fewer affordable and viable housing options. 

Chicago must address its intertwined issues holistically, as its current piecemeal approach has severely hindered the city’s ability to be a desirable and affordable place to call home. In a future post, I will identify short- and long-term actions and suggest solutions toward alleviating Chicago’s housing shortage, such as expanding the city’s accessory dwelling units (ADU) ordinance, allowing 4-flats by right, removing parking mandates, and enacting a land value tax, among other ideas. 

Fortunately, a number of volunteer organizations are focusing on addressing Chicago’s housing shortage, such as Abundant Housing Illinois and Strong Towns Chicago. That these groups have grown drastically in size over the past year is a clear sign that city residents will no longer sit back and wait for City Hall to unravel the threads of Chicago’s polycrisis.  

Josh Chodor is a master’s student in the University of Illinois Chicago’s Urban Planning and Policy program as well as a member of Abundant Housing Illinois and Strong Towns Chicago.